Dazed and Confused said:
One of Armstrong's biggest critics suddenly changes her mind and write a book.
Small change in the broader scheme of things I think.
She was on National Radio in New Zealand this morning. I would've normally tuned out but my colleague got to the radio first, and I thought for once I should spare him my eclectic mix of The Misfits, Caetano Velsoso, and Blind Willie Johnson.
After listening to the interview, I was left with the feeling that she's been played by his charm, and, that she has become part of the redemption campaign.
She made some fine points regarding the value of free will and personal responsibility-- especially as our boys in blue entered an already corrupt system of drugs, pay offs, and decadence.
However, I don't subscribe to Emma's point of view. While they all chose to dope, chose to cheat, chose to deceive the sponsors and the public, none did it with a more cynical and self serving attitude than Lance.
And, of course, none were more vicious in denial.
Don't know Emma. Never met her. Didn't know anything about her until a meeting with David Walsh in 2004 or 2005, after which I considered her one of the first casualties of the truth; but now I now fear that her judgement is clouded by a falsely perceived notion that she and Lance share a brother/sister relationship.
I've not known anyone as inherently flawed as Lance Armstrong, and fear for anyone whose judgement precludes them from keeping him at arm's length.
What he is not is a martyr, nor a victim.
He just simply is another incredibly immoral human being who just so happens to be an athlete.
And a cyclist.
In another world, he'd be the best guy in Folsom Prison on the spin bike.